About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
on everything from the disruptive effect of technology to the acoustics of punching music venues, i am pleased to have him back on this program. welcome. >> good to be back here. >> rose: so tell me what this is. >> i mean it is part memoir. >> a bit of memoir stuff, not a lot but a little bit, it is mainly about music, how the context of music finds itself in, affects what the music turns out to be. >> rose: what do you mean by context? >> there is a lot of them. >> right. >> okay. and i didn't set out to write that, i started writing some essays and things and i realized, wow, this is what it is about that it could be the stage, performing on a stage, the fact that you have to do something live performing in front of other people and it could be the acoustics of the live venue, whether it is reverb brandt space like a cathedral r a little club in nashville .. it could be the finances of trying to be a musician, trying to be a composer and make a little of it and that narrows down and defines what you can reasonably do. you can have the same ambitions but they are going t going to k- they ar
on the idea that technology is the only answer to our military challenges, that we are only going to fight certain kinds of wars in the future. you know, we say we would never fight another counterinsurgency after vietnam but guess what, we did, and as i look back at all of the times we have used military force since vietnam, when it comes to predicting where we will use our military next, we have a perfect record. >> rose: we are always wrong. >> i have never gotten it right, not once. >> rose: why? >> because the world is unpredictable. and so my mantra when i was secretary was, we need a force that is equipped and trained to provide the maximum possible versatility across the broadest possible range of conflict, because we can't predict what the next conflict will be like and, therefore, we have to train and have as much flexibility and versatility as possible. we can't just prepare for one kind of conflict. > >> rose: you also have said, i think on leaving, that i don't want to be secretary of state when you are fighting these kind of ground wars, you know, with increasing budget deman
to and from was one of the most unusual parts because they operate using technology that hasn't really been used before. >> rose: i should set this up for the audience at home who hasn't obviously seen the movie. this is a story how they would lead him to pakistan and a story about how they made a decision to go in and either capture or kill osama bin laden. there's are two different stories. >> and there's the story. >> there's a third story when they go in and actually do it. >> two for the price of one. >> rose: talk about the c.i.a. aspect of this. how long did it take them to get on the trail that would lead them somewhere? because we know that after 9/11 i mean they were all kinds of things going on with american national security people to get somebody to give some information as to where osama bin laden was, to get their hands on osama bin laden. >> well, i mean my humble opinion, mark did an extraordinary job of reporting this and then out of the reporting turning this into an incredibly dramatic screen play. i'm the recipient of that trying to transform those pages into a screen
on stage with president obama, it wasn't about television ads or whiz bang turnout technologies, it was about fundamental republican ideas versus fundamental democratic ideas. it was about lower taxes or higher taxes less government or more government, more freedom and less freedom. and republican ideals mitt romney carried the day. stevens was a controversial figure throughout the campaign. he drew criticism externally for being too cautious in defining his candidate and internally for being a sometimes divisive and material figure. in august a new republic profiled him as friendship with mitt romney. the article was published under the title the square and the flare. i've known stuart stevens for a long time and i am pleased to have him here at this table this one of his first conversations about the politics 2012, who won, who lost and why. thank you for coming. >> well i can clarify that. we lost. >> rose: but when did you think you were going to lose? >> we're always very realistic about it contrary to some roorts. we thought we had a good chance to win. after the storm i
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)